Maiduguri falls below the horizon, and a tense air is felt. Parents rush children to homes, shopkeepers draw down their shutters and streets, which had been busy with people, become quiet. It is not only that there is the fear of an errant bullet or an attack by a bandit; it is the tearing awareness that when misfortune befalls, assistance may be wanting, or worse, they may be part of the comforters.
This is what street-level life insecurity in Nigeria is all about: surviving in a sea of violence that is sweeping every part of the country, from the farmlands of Benue to the busy markets of Lagos.
The official version, though, tends to be much different. We hear Abuja’s pronouncement of the spread of small arms, the the importation of foreign fighters, and how more advanced weapons are required. This is always changed to the instruments of violence, and the problem is now being seen as an arms battle that Nigeria has to win.
Hundreds of billions are spent, new security programs are announced, and military actions are organized, all of which supposedly suppress the process of weapons. This is the wish lens of the government, an issue that needs a technical solution, technical and frequently militaristic.
However, this story is a potentially hazardous distraction. It diagnoses the disease essentially wrongly. The reality is brutal: it is not only guns that are the issue of security in Nigeria, but it is a deeper crisis of governance. The contradiction is conspicuous. As authorities lament about weapons, those institutions that are in place to offer security to the citizens tend to be full of corruption, inefficiency, and an overall disregard of due process.
The bandits can act with impunity, and in most cases, this is due to the compromised or overwhelmed local authorities. Terrorist organizations not only prosper on the presence of weapons but also on the emptiness of the state and the hopelessness of the injustice.
What is the reason behind this gap between the official position and the reality experienced? It is a calculated confusion. To accept that the biggest problem is governance is to acknowledge that the system is so broken that it will rob the security budget and inject funds into the hole of systemic corruption; it would be to acknowledge that there is no accountability to hold the perpetrators to justice.
It would be accepting that it is not the periphery of poverty, youth unemployment, court weakness, and political manipulation but a straight shot of violence. It is more politically convenient to hold an enemy or simply the fact that weapons exist accountable than to destroy the internal systems that facilitate the proliferation of insecurity.
Nigerians, who observe this play day in and day out, are not deluded. They know instinctively that it was not the weapon that was being held by the bandit, but rather the malfunctioning system that enabled him to take it up, or more to the point, that defends him once he has taken it. They witness security services that are hard-pressed, ill-equipped, and usually depressed.
When the victims do not even find an ear willing to listen to them and the perpetrators go scot-free, they experience the pain of injustice. What is being said loudly and clearly by the people of Nigeria is that until their leaders are willing to make a real reform in the way they conduct their governance,, naming corruption, institution building, justice,, and the provision of economic opportunity, no gun control or military expenditure can ever make the country truly safe. More guns is not the answer; it is good government.
